Posts made by Arkandel

@insomniac7809 So let's use a specific scenario from a Wheel of Time setting as an example case of how these principles should be applied.

In that universe there are two closely allied factions: Aes Sedai and Warders. The former are witches who are literally unable to use their magic to harm anyone other than the Big Bad's servants, and the latter are elite warriors acting as their bodyguards.

Therefore what theoretically keeps Aes Sedai in check are social reasons (mobs with pitchforks - the superstitious populace will turn against usage of magic), magical (their power won't work against regular people) and other enemy factions who'd love to burn dem witches.

In practice as was mentioned earlier in the thread players skirted the lines fairly regularly:

• Aes Sedai PCs used loopholes they didn't in the books. "I can't burn you alive but I can immobilize and gut you with this here sword", "I'll use magic to throw a boulder at your head, how's that?"
• Skewed demographics: The prevalence of magic users weakened anti-magic user factions who should have been far more populous, but which in practice was never the case on the grid.
• This all weakened Warders' niche as bodyguards.

Balancing the reality of the game versus the atmosphere we wanted based on the book series the setting was derived from was a common debate.

@insomniac7809 said in Balancing wizards and warriors:

But in a system where, say, investigation and diplomacy are given just as much mechanical weight as the murdery bits, there's nothing wrong with having the PC who kills things real good getting to dominate the scene, in the same way Sherlock Perot gets to shine in the locked room murder scenario and Wilhelmina Foppingtin XIV gets to rock in the socialite ball.

The typical issue with this scenario is that in scenes your diplomat and my fireball-bot will both end up socially engaging other PCs, discussing politics, asking for favors, etc - and typically players don't throw dice for these.

However come time for combat guess who's gonna throw the biggest fireball, baby!

@ganymede said in Dead Celebrities 2021 Edition:

@ganymede

It has been done.

Who summoned me? I demand blood.

... I mean, you seem to have summoned yourself.

In much of my adult life I was an avid reader. Even as of a few years ago, while I commuted to work, I would read at least one book per week on the bus - sometimes more.

Then I stopped. YouTube, games, Netflix, Reddit... they were easier, and I grew out of the habit.

I finished my first book in years yesterday. The Blacktongue Thief by Christopher Buehlman was a fucking treat; really strong characters, an intriguing setting, witty dialogue and great prose. I enjoyed it greatly.

Onwards to catching up with series I had abandoned before finishing! The Fires of Vengeance by Evan Winters is next.

<braid tugging intensifies>

@greenflashlight Those are valid questions.

While obviously it's a case by case basis, the original issue all those years ago which prompted me to start a thread now was that in the Wheel of Time the power gap between channelers (the 'wizards' of the setting) and the 'warriors' was very significant. And that included some augmented types of 'warriors' who had special tricks up their sleeves, not just regular well-trained combatants.

When it comes to its magic, in the WoT setting the canonical checks and balances are either very much on a macro-scale (a relatively small group of women wouldn't last long against entire nations launching constant attacks against them) so that they had to self-restrain or too long term; male channelers became mad and rotted or burned out, but that wouldn't easily happen within the scope of playing a PC.

So the issue we had was that entire factions who were supposed to have the upper hand and be feared by channelers were not, so if you played a character among those you'd get a different experience than what would be expected from the setting.

Demographics were similarly skewed; at some point a friend of my PC had joked IC that he was starting to assume every woman he met could channel since it was happening to him so often, even though they were supposed to be very rare indeed.

However outside of that example I'd urge us to consider more common scenarios in current MU*. For example in comic book games are people not choosing to play Robin/Hawkeye as opposed to Superboy/Thor? In Star Wars games are other types of characters than Jedi or Sith popular and successful as archetypes?

@too-old-for-this said in RL Sads:

@arkandel We were also promised hoverboards! And those WERE promised to one and all! Even small children in a relatively small town of the 'future' had them!

I gotcha covered.

@wizz said in RL Sads:

Why do we not all have jetpacks yet, WE WERE PROMISED JETPACKS IN THE FUTURE.

Hrm? Jetpacks already exist!

But no one promised we'd all have one. Like everything else expensive toys go to those who can afford them.

@derp Thanks for answering! It sounds like you're in the school of balancing PCs.

Aside of the how that would work, do you care to comment on the why? Do the pros of wizards and warriors being roughly equal in power outweigh the cons?

Hello folks,

I was thinking about the troubles we had a long time ago running a Wheel of Time MU* so I wanted to open the topic for debate here. It could be fun.

So here's the thing: Assume players can play both 'magic' users and warriors (anyone without magic!) in the same setting. It could be that you're basing your game on books or a TV show, like we did, maybe it's an original work, but ultimately you have a girl who can throw fireballs from her fingertips and a guy who wields sharp pieces of metal in his hand.

How do you balance these different characters? Do you balance them out?

What are the consequences either way? For example if (which is not necessarily a true assumption) most players gravitate towards 'wizards' because of their relative power levels you may end up with skewed demographics, assuming they're supposed to be rare for your setting. On the other hand hand-picking players eligible to play those rare types might lead to allegations of favoritism.

Thoughts?

@ominous said in How is there not a Gloomhaven thread here?:

Because D&D exists and an expensive ass board game that does D&D worse than D&D is a waste of money.

Why have more than one RPG!

(This is derailing the thread's topic)

There are two fundamental problems with justification requirements.

The first is that they cannot be universal unless it's a single-sphere game, and that creates an additional barrier to character progression - one that's based on the player, not their PC. The Vampire raising Blood Potence? "Uh, my blood got stronger I guess!" The Uratha raising Renown? "... Let me find someone to run a PrP chain, hope the dice which need to be challenging don't kill the PC, find someone IC to spin the deed and then write a small essay."

The second is the very purpose of having justification requirements in the first place isn't consistent in general. If it's to promote IC plausibility then no character on the grid should ever raise their Medicine over 3 unless they start high; that stuff takes years! If it's to ensure only the top players with most robust understanding of the rules rise in power or skill then why tie it to IC achievements in the first place?

These are essentially home grown systems-within-systems.

@warma-sheen said in Dare I ask...:

@arkandel Really? I've had a very different, more complicated experience. But I'm in Mage sphere so there may be different policies in each sphere.

Oh I meant in general, not for this particular game. I haven't played there.

@egg said in Dare I ask...:

@il-volpe I've personally never had any of my "justified" XP spends rejected. It doesn't have to be too complicated; just have a reason for buying something other than "it's cool and I want it."

I think it comes down to is people who could write a BS essay in highschool to meet some arbitrary word count requirement without having read the source material also do well at writing XP expenditure justifications.

So yeah I never had one turned down either.

Is it good? I've heard of Gloomhaven but never played it.

Is the PC version multiplayer?

@silverfox said in Critters!:

My uncle gave me some of his cheaper lightsabers

The last time this kinda thing happened people lost their hands and families got reunited.

@derp said in Movie / TV / Streaming Peeves or Whatever:

@jennkryst

Lower Decks is fantastic! Haters gonna hate.

Best Star Trek I've seen in years, along with Orville.

@groth One of the videos I really love to watch is the "how stuff is made" kind.

It makes me feel... humble. In my chosen industry we get a bit cocky about just how damn smart everyone is; we architect, design, implement, troubleshoot and maintain these ever-evolving pieces of infrastructure, then do the same for the applications we run on them. We're so smart!

Then I see how something like... those hard tips are put on shoelaces, or how bottlecaps go on bottles are actually made. Or how carpenters put tables together without using a single nail.

The world is full of really smart, capable people. It's awe inspiring.

When I think about it, and I have been, I like growing old. Or, rather, I like the older me.

Growing old will eventually kill me (unless something else does first). So that's the downside!

But I think I've been able to leverage the experience of my own as well as others' mistakes to fix some things about how I live the time I have left. For example I've come to realize:

1. There are parts of my mental and physical health I need to prioritize, and do so. But also that doing so is itself an improvement; it's a form of self-respect.
2. Others won't care about or even notice any of those things. They have their own shit to think about. No one gives a shit about what I do, my personal triumphs or achievements, no matter how hard-earned they are.
3. I'm okay with that. They have their own lives to look after, and should.

These things were by no means trivial for me to internalize. It was, at times, difficult to even realize that I had agency in changing things about myself on any level rather than to accept who I was.

Be yourself and be comfortable in your own skin are perfectly good pieces of advice but they shouldn't limit the potential of who I can become - as long as I want to.

@ominous said in Good TV:

@arkandel

I kind of want someone to make a parody of LOTR that is that.

Not quite the same thing but how about a recap?